Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sarah Galbally


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. Kurykh (talk) 00:55, 15 March 2017 (UTC)

Sarah Galbally

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Per POLOUTCOMES, cabinet officers in national governments are notable, however, cabinet officers in sub-national governments need to meet GNG. While there are numerous references in which Galbally is mentioned, they are the normal and expected quotes and comments that would be routine with her job. DarjeelingTea (talk) 10:41, 26 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 17:54, 26 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 17:54, 26 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Pennsylvania-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 17:54, 26 February 2017 (UTC)


 * Keep In general major figures in state-level government are notable, and Galbally qualifies as such.John Pack Lambert (talk) 18:00, 26 February 2017 (UTC)
 * My impression was that "major" - insofar as state governments were concerned - were officers of executive rank (Secretary of State, Comptroller, Lt. Governor, etc.), not officers of cabinet rank? DarjeelingTea (talk) 09:11, 27 February 2017 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Delete Galbally is not a member of a state legislature so does not meet WP:NPOL in my opinion. AusLondonder (talk) 03:26, 27 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Comment There's only one cite in there and it doesn't support most of the existing text. The unsourced content needs to be removed, and if no references can be found, it should be deleted. Bangabandhu (talk) 05:48, 6 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete. The claim of notability here would be enough in and of itself if she could actually be sourced over WP:GNG for it — but it does not entitle her to keep an article that's sourced only to her own "staff" bio on the primary source web page of the governor's office itself. Bearcat (talk) 21:36, 6 March 2017 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Natg 19 (talk) 02:06, 7 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete Doesn't pass WP:NPOL. Uhooep (talk) 06:52, 12 March 2017 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.